Tim Stachowski Locke, empiricist -all knowledge derived from the sense

PHL154 Final Material Outline

sense simple operation of the mind idea complex or simple (modality, relation, context) central question: what is virtue? -examines natural state of man -no society/rules what would we be like? Locke Positive = Humans are benevolent, social, moral Hobbs negative = aggressive, solitary, selfish, and amoral b/c god created us, gave us rights on loan from him, should not be squandered deontological: to ensure these rights egoistic, ensure we ourselves have as well - declaration of independence - Rights: o 1. Life o 2. Liberty o 3. Happiness Locke is consequentialist -Magistrates have right to judge 1. Punishment violates our antological duty 2. God exists? 3. Empiricist Thomas Hobbes -Leviathan 1651 - anti-social aggressive self amoral -Puritan Revolution -struggle ideological, political w/ King Charles vs Puritans Argument: (Categorical Syllogism) P1: All humans are aggressive by nature P2: all who are aggressive need rules to live by Therefore all humans need rules to live by Causes of aggression 1. equality of need a. we all need some things to survive 2. fact of scarcity a. desperation for needs is augmented by scarcity -

3. relative equality of human power a. no one is physically or intellectually strong enough to satisfy needs P1: All that benefits society is ethical (universalist premise) P2: limited altruism benefits society (egoistic, forced concern for fellow man) Therefore limited altruism is ethical Social Contract Theory: -reason -freely Social Contract -pact of non aggression -pact of fidelity Problems: 1. Based on historical fiction (knows nothing about humans) 2. Not everyone can participate (i.e. children mentally deficient) 3. Ideals self-defeating (fundamentally misunderstanding by hobbes, if people are aggressive people wont follow rules) 1. Platonic Dialogue 2. The meno (by plato) a. Socratic dialect 3 Groups b. Socratic irony Group 1 apology, Crito, leathyphro Group 2 Meno, Phaedris Group 3 republic, symposium, laws Meno, wealthy statesman throwing dinner party w/ Socrates Meno asks about virtue: Socrates replies: what can we know about virtue? What can we know in general? - we can know something about virtue but not completely general - for all knowledge as recollection (Marx) - Democritus (the social atomistic) o Anything that has been known and will be known is known o Knowledge is innate Marx Dialect Hypothesis ------ > antithesis (test of idea) -- Synthesis Socrates: knowing/knowledge is infinite as cosmos itself Socratic Irony

in the end the only thing we can be certain of is uncertainty of knowledge of virtue problem with infinite regress o x0000 where did knowledge come from before people? Regression ad infinitum Meautic midwife o Dialect helps bring idea to fruition, meautic process

1. Marxist Ethics a. History + context b. Goal of ethics c. Responsible Marx argues against informal judge Marx: -interested in same thing as Plato, what makes a good society? -communist manifesto -Germanys founding, -create a society 1. ensure quality among men is respected (ensured) 2. happiness of greater population ensured - how the greater good is socratic in nature, dialectic 4 major impediments to happiness: 1. ideology a. intellectually ruling class philosophy/theology pollute minds makes us easy to control being abused to control uneducated suffer cannot obtain equality 2. historical materialism a. that everyone is human, thought/ action is determined by affluence people with different amounts of money see the world differently intrinsically treated as not equal 3. alienation a. what makes people happy is the product of their labor often people cannot enjoy fruits of labor 4. surplus value we are never paid for what were worth EVER doesnt lead to happiness whole of human history reflects Socratic dialogue Marx: being ethical is constantly questioning what is right Myth of Sisyphus -happiness isnt necessarily possible but should be pursued. Guy pushing rock up hill and never makes it 1. Rousseau and Rights Ethics

a. First Discourse: i. Misery b. Second Discourse i. Evil ii. Hope Rousseau published in Amsterdam -asks why people in Paris are so miserable - modern society isnt a pleasant place -rob steal kill -cant escape it 1. Civilization causes misery 2. technology - envy people who dont have fancy technology fear violence Second Discourse: -Evil Augustine: -God exists but how can we allow society to become what it is? Plato: -evil doesnt exist, damnation is our own choice Rousseau realizes Augustine never identifies god -questions self defeating premise Augustine: God is omnipotent cant allow evil to exist Rousseau addresses Augustinian theory as inadequate, why does evil exist? Reasons for existence of Evil: - No reason - God lets evil exist but doesnt reveal why o God knows we dont understand o God doesnt want us to know his will - Evil exists to that we can learn our own lessons about it Hope -there is hope for us all as long as we return to our natural state noble, benevolent, caring creature that are corrupted by society Adopt 4 habits: 1. sympathy 2. compassion 3. generosity 4. forgiveness THIS IS WHAT GOOD IS